In this episode of Editorial, Mr. Sujit Nair discusses the all-party delegations formed by the Indian government, which will travel to key partner countries to convey India’s message of zero tolerance against terrorism following the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor. Mr. Nair raises a crucial point about how proper planning and execution in this diplomatic outreach become important to counter Pakistan. Another key point he explores is Shashi Tharoor’s alleged ambition for political power, his apparent closeness to the BJP, and his growing distance from the Congress party.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
[00:00:00] Namaskar! Welcome to another episode of Editorial. The Bharatiya Janata Party led NDA has called for an All-Party Delegation that will talk about India's point of view on Pakistan and the recent Indo-Pak war.
[00:00:22] They will talk about what our perspective of this entire issue is and the problems that India is facing. And also kind of mitigate misinformation that Pakistan has spread pretty well. Is it a good idea? It's a fabulous idea. Fantastic idea.
[00:00:46] You see, but there are two things that one needs to keep in mind and which is what we are going to talk about in this editorial. First, it's an All-Party Delegation which means it is essentially a political delegation. It has to remain a political. The question is, is this delegation a political?
[00:01:09] Question 1. Question 2 is, do we know what we are going to present? Are the members of this delegation trained to present? Because what this is, is the highest form of communication. You're communicating for the country. You're communicating our perspective.
[00:01:32] Communication, planned communication or organized communication can't be bigger than this. Are we trained? Are we ready for it? That's the question number 2. Let's get right into the show.
[00:01:42] So let's talk about the first issue first. You see, this is meant to be an All-Party Delegation. Beyond party lines, beyond everything. In fact, that was a very nice statement that Mr. Rijuju, our Honorable Minister, had made. Mr. Kiran Rijuju said that these party members are on solemn duty representing the country, not a party. This was his last statement. I will talk to you about his earlier, the first statement.
[00:02:18] First part of his statement, first part of his statement in a while, but this was his last statement, which I thought was perfectly correct. You see, these members, these people, these MPs are going abroad not to represent their political party. They are going abroad to represent their country. So it should be above politics. But is it above politics?
[00:02:40] You see, now let me come to the first part of Mr. Kiran Rijuju's statement. Mr. Kiran Rijuju says that no party was asked to suggest names for the multi-party delegation for rallying global support for India war against terror organizations from Pakistan. He said we didn't ask any party party and all.
[00:03:00] He said the government has picked leaders including those from the opposition and contacted them directly, but the opposition should not make it into an issue as they are on a solemn duty representing the country, not the party. You see, he says we have picked whoever we like we picked and we told them you go and you become delegation and you know and you go talk about the country, which like I said is very good. Opposition should not make an issue out of it.
[00:03:29] My point is, my point is, why is this government acting, especially Bharatiya Janata Party, acting so arrogant? Why are they considering opposition persona non grata? Literally, isn't it? We just picked up people from the opposition party and we said come join the delegation.
[00:03:49] Why couldn't you just talk to the opposition leader and say nominate two people from your political party and we would like to make a delegation and if you don't like the people they have nominated, go back to them and say we don't like this particular person. Can you give us another option? Wouldn't that be better? Wouldn't that be actually getting everybody along? Showing a united face other than just poaching people and saying tu maja, tu maja, tu maja, well with the leader, well with your party.
[00:04:15] The point about it being a solemn duty and you know being above party lines and all is fine. But the fact is, how does it matter if it is in consensus? Because that's what democracy is all about, isn't it? That's what India is all about, consensus. So why do you undermine that?
[00:04:35] And why do you use this opportunity to pull people like, people like, fence-sitters like Shashi Tarur and try to kind of make him larger than life so that you embarrass Congress? Isn't that politics? TK. Now let's talk about Shashi Tarur. My topic two.
[00:04:57] A lot of senior journalists, a lot of intellectuals, they say that Shashi Tarur was anyway going to be made. See, Shashi Tarur was made into a, he was asked to be heading the delegation. And then, and he's supposed to go to US and spread the message. B, you know, since he's already offered and he's already accepted it. So, you know, Congress should have adhered and Congress should have said, okay, he's our representative.
[00:05:25] That should, would have been very intelligent of Congress. That would have been a master stroke of Congress. Achcha. TK. That's a very valid point. I'm not disputing that point. In fact, initially, I also thought that should be the way it should be. But tell me, tell me, tell me, Congress, you, we all know the position Shashi Tarur is in. We all know the position Shashi Tarur is in.
[00:05:53] Shashi Tarur, he was actually parting from Congress in all forms. Possibly, he wanted to be the President of Congress, couldn't be. Then he thought, TK President, at least can I get to be the Chief Minister of Kerala? Chances are, there is no way he can be. So, he was very frustrated with Congress anyways. So, he decided to be Nationalist. So, he decided to be Bharatiya Janata Party spokesman literally.
[00:06:23] Unofficial, but almost. I will tell you what I mean by that. A simple example. You see, he is the one, he is the person who has been speaking about Pail Gham in India and how great the government has done, what good work the government has done. I am not saying what he is saying is right or wrong. That is not my argument at all. But he has been saying that all of a sudden. But you see, how can you fully support Pail Gham and talk bad about Balakot and Pulwama?
[00:06:51] This was the same Shashi Tarur who had said that Pail Gham and Balakot examples of how BJP used National Security to profit. Shashi Tarur says it. Shashi Tarur goes on to say, and I am quoting Shashi Tarur from India today. Shashi Tarur goes on to say that we were wrong. Because indeed Pail Gham and Balakot were very good examples of how National Security issues
[00:07:18] was used to support the BJP's effort. So Balakot and Pulwama, wrong. Pail Gham, he says he is going to be the face to show the world. Tomorrow he goes to America and he is asked a question. How is Balakot and Pulwama different?
[00:07:40] Why did you say Balakot and Pulwama was used to support or used as advantage to Bharatiya Janata Party? And how is this different? What is your statement now? Do you agree to that statement, the earliest statement? If he is asked this question, what answer would he be giving? With all this, he was still taken in as delegate. So his stance is very clear. His stance is, it is not about nationalism or East. He is very clear. It is about his opportunity that he gets.
[00:08:10] Now he finds opportunity in Bharatiya Janata Party. He finds takers in Bharatiya Janata Party. He could be inducted in Bharatiya Janata Party. He could get a position in Bharatiya Janata Party. So he is going the Bharatiya Janata Party way. He tried his luck with Congress. He couldn't get. Now he believes that he is going to win. He is also ambitious. He also wants to sit in positions. Ideology of ideology and all is secondary. And it is not the top priority. How can it be?
[00:08:39] Politics nowadays, it is always the opportunity which is the top priority. Ideology has no place in it. So he till yesterday said that Balakot and Fulvama was to make efforts for supporting Bharatiya Janata Party. Today he will say it is all, you know, the prime minister and the government is perfect. Everything was perfect. I don't know which one of his statement he believes in. So the point is coming back to my question. What if tomorrow there is a question asked?
[00:09:09] Whether your LOP statement about Jai Shankar is right or wrong? If there is a question asked to Mr. Shashitarur in say an American press conference, what would he say? And if he ended up saying that no, I think Rahul Gandhi shouldn't have asked that question and he is representing Congress, imagine where that puts Congress to. And when he comes back, what is Congress going to say? So to my mind, Congress decision was right. Congress decision was right. Let's keep this aside.
[00:09:41] Let's talk about what is this delegation supposed to go and talk internationally. You see, the job of this delegation, if it has to be looked at from a strategic communication point of view, the job of this delegation is to create a narrative. What does the concept of creating a narrative means?
[00:10:11] Creating a narrative means to create a perspective in the globe or in your audience or in your market, that perspective is which is not there before. I will try and explain myself. You see, it is not that this group can go to Dubai or to South Africa or to United States and say that Pakistan harbors terrorism.
[00:10:36] I don't think there is a child in this world who doesn't know that Pakistan harbors terrorism. It is the hub of terrorism. It is a headquarters for terrorism. I don't think there is a child in this world who doesn't know it. So what is that they are going to go and communicate? And if you are not communicating anything new, then what is that people are going to absorb? What is that people are going to consume? Why would people want to listen to you? You are saying what everybody knows.
[00:11:07] Osama bin Laden was caught from that country for crying out loud. The world knows that it is a hub of terrorism. What are we going to communicate? Is there a new story to tell? Number one. Number two. You see, communication starts with we. Communication doesn't start with me. Communication can be you.
[00:11:35] So if I start a communication and I talk about you, your problem, your effort, your benefits, yeah, you would be interested in listening to it because it's you. Or I talk about our problems, our solutions, what can benefit us, it will still interest you. But if I talk about what is my problem, what can benefit me, what are my solutions, why should it benefit you? Why should you be interested?
[00:12:04] So an effective communication is when you involve the listener to what you are presenting. Now let us come back to the Pakistan India issue. How are we going to involve the world? Pakistan. Like I said, if you go out and say that Pakistan is armoring terrorism, yeah, everybody knows it. Pakistan is armoring terrorism. Pakistan is armoring terrorism. The difference is that this time around, it is not just terrorism that Pakistan is propagating.
[00:12:33] Pakistan is trying to cause a larger divide in our country and this divide can affect the entire world. world. That is the big story. This time around, Pakistan and that military fellow of Pakistan, that man tried to first create a divide between Hindu and Muslims which normally military doesn't do. He first tried to create the difference between Hindu and Muslims.
[00:13:03] Then he targeted Hindu dominated regions of India. He targeted Rajasthan. He targeted Jammu. He targeted Punjab. He targeted Amritsar. The Hindu Sikh belt of India. He didn't target Srinagar much. It was very clear.
[00:13:26] The terrorists came, asked the victims their religion and then shot them. Through this attack, Pakistan took the concept of just harboring terrorism or terrorism to the next level. Now Pakistan was consciously promoting Islamophobia.
[00:13:52] Pakistan was trying to create that divide between Islam and other communities. Islam and other religion. This time it was Islam and Hinduism. Tomorrow they can create a rift, maybe across the globe because this crack will go through and through. They were in some form isolating Muslims.
[00:14:19] Our message is more that it happened to us in India today. It could happen to any other country. That's the story we have to tell. Secondly, Pakistan, they go around telling the world that they have some kind of right to interfere in Kashmir because Kashmir predominantly has a Muslim population.
[00:14:49] What absurdity. India has more Muslim population than Pakistan. You see, India like I told you is the second highest Muslim population in the world. What is Pakistan talking about? Every state in India, every city in India, every lane in India has a Hindu and a Muslim staying together more often than not in perfect harmony and peace.
[00:15:19] So what claim is Pakistan talking about? What claim is Pakistan talking about? Does this concept that Kashmir has as Muslim majority, does that give any right for Pakistan to intervene? Point number two. You think Pakistan offers a golden visa like Dubai, if Pakistan offers a golden visa, do you think Indian Muslims are going to rush to Pakistan? Do you think it is going to happen?
[00:15:46] Like Javed Akhtar said, Jahannam or Pakistan, if you have a choice, I will prefer Jahannam rather than going to Pakistan. That was what Javed Akhtar had said and very well said. And this is true to any Muslims in India. You see, what Pakistan should understand is that our Muslims, we are them, they are us. There is no difference like in their country. We are one people in India. And I think that is what needs to be communicated.
[00:16:17] That is what needs to be spoken. Pakistan's two nation theory is not working in Pakistan. Pakistan wants that two nation theory to work in India now so that they can build a divide between Hindus and Muslims. And therefore, this illogical claim, that illogical claim can be completely busted. And that is what this delegation can go and do.
[00:16:46] That is what this delegation can go and do. Nip the problem from the bud. But it is very clear that this is not a Pakistan game. Pakistan has played this as a tag team, as a puppet of China. You can't isolate China out of all this. China has very well supported Pakistan to wage this war against India. And if it wasn't for China, Pakistan wouldn't have stood a minute against us.
[00:17:15] That too, I think the world should know. Because every time and any time a country is even remotely closer to being prosperous, China would want to put a stop to it. China would want to intervene. They did it with Australia. They did it with almost every developing countries. China is going to create a problem for you. China created that for every country. China is creating that for India.
[00:17:43] And what we need to tell the world is China will create this for every country that is prosperous or that is on its way to prosperity. This is the story we need to say. And my last point. My last point is, are member of parliament our only spokesperson? They could be their spokesperson. I am not disputing it.
[00:18:13] But are member of parliament only our spokesperson? Are they the most popular faces of India in the world? Why is this delegation only about the member of parliament? Why is an Amitabh Bachchan not asked to go and give speeches? He is intellectually better than a lot of names that I read. Why not a Sachin Tendulkar? Why not a Shah Rukh Khan? Why not a Rajiv Bajaj?
[00:18:42] Why not a Rajnekanth? These are popular faces in the world. These are super popular faces in the world. Couldn't they also be integrated with this delegation? You would have had more people coming and watching your conferences, watching your speeches. People would have taken half day to see a Rajnekanth and Amitabh Bachchan. Do you think the same will be said about some of these MPs that are going? I am not saying therefore don't send the MPs.
[00:19:12] I am saying make the net wider. Make this wider. Let people of all walks of life of India, especially the people who are celebrated, people who are globally popular, let them also be part of this because their credibility, what they say, will reach a lot more people. Priyanka Chopra, these are people who are globally famous.
[00:19:38] What they say will reach a lot more eyeballs. They will get a lot more eyeballs and it will reach a lot more people in this world. And possibly, possibly, since they are not, they are a political, they are genuinely a political, it will also have a little more credibility than a politician talking about it. Because not that I am saying that, you know, I'm, I'm casting any person aspersions. I am saying a politician, it is his job.
[00:20:08] But when a person from a creative field comes and talks about it, yeah, I mean the world, there's a slight chances of the world believing him or her more. So couldn't this presenters, those, these, these ambassadors who are going across the globe, couldn't that be wider? This is the question I will end with. And till I see you next time, that's tomorrow at 10. Namaskar.